650b?

[eddief]

Douglas, if you don't mind, since you admit to being the force behind the Riv Saluki, can you speak more about 650B? I can say that the look is unique and for that reason alone I am more than distracted to give it consideration. But what are the dynamics behind this French standard? Solid ride characteristics? Center of gravity???? Why 650B rather than normal mt bike wheels and smooth tires? Any background info appreciated.

[dbrk]

There is nothing "normal" about mountain bike wheels in comparison to 650B. Every wheel size has its history and like many things that become "standards" there are explanations but not necessarily good reasons, such is the case with 559mm or the current mtn bike standard. It is merely globalization of industry that has imposed 559 upon us, nothing like virtue or quality of ride.

Historically most wheel sizes arose according to geographical idiosyncrasies and serendipities (those being different things). The idiosyncrasy part is that wheels were adapted regionally to different roads and styles of riding. In France where the roads were not as good as in England, for example, the 584mm (called 650B) arose because cyclotourism (another cultural feature of a post-War ---first and second---vacationing on the cheap) meant backroads that begged for stalwart wheels, wider tires, and still a good roll. We can argue too that modern race wheels have gotten lighter and tires skinnier because roads are just better. The 559mm wheel is quite sturdy for off road riding but it has proven time and again to be a compromise, and in my judgment a poor compromise, to road riding whether it is pavement, urban assault, or rough roading (like the dirt and gravel and railroad beds that are common here in rural western NY). If you are pure asphalt rider then you've likely long forsaken 559/mtn wheels and if you haven't then you should.

The place between 622mm/700c and 559/mtnbike _could_ be 584mm/650B. (Grant, of course, knows about this history, etc. but he is a practical man and it took a great deal of persuasion and risk on his part to set off on the now-Saluki.) Some will argue that the added momentum and roll of the 650B is not worth the oddity. If you breakdown in Oouagadougou on your lifetime dream ride across Burkhino Faso and you can't find a rim then you are SOL, right? Of course fanatasies include catastrophes and most cyclists are very good at both without having to suffer too much in practical reality. To wit, most of us don't taco rims or end up SOL for too long. Why "risk" it? Well, that's easy. It's the ride. 650B is sublime. Sure you can't zoot around like on a 622mm and many of the "recreational" or "competitive" bicycle riders here wouldn't like it, don't get it, and could care less (just like I care less about carbon bits, multi-media tubing, heart rate monitors, and saving the next few grams). The point is not to "be different" or even quirky, the point is to experience something that is worthwhile, interesting, fun, and perhaps even, dare I say it, better.

As you moved across Europe before the modern age of globalization wheels and bikes reflected culture, attitudes, values, interests. Wheel size was one way of putting your finger on those issues, so is frame design and fit. This is part of what makes me look at American cycling and realize how little I think I share with most cyclists around me. There will be enough people who "get" 650B to sell some bikes but it will be a difficult niche that has nothing to do with the trends.

dbrk

[eddief]

That was just the right amount of info and what I was seeking to learn. Even though a niche, it seems like a good (small) box for Grant to open. Lots of nice little traditional bits and pieces to add on for those who are attracted to something in addition to their choice of "normal" road bikes. My curiousity is peaked, but must enjoy the new Rambouillet before embarking on 650B-ness. At least that's what I'm thinking today.